Literature DB >> 27498378

Propensity score model overfitting led to inflated variance of estimated odds ratios.

Tibor Schuster1, Wilfrid Kouokam Lowe2, Robert W Platt3.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Simulation studies suggest that the ratio of the number of events to the number of estimated parameters in a logistic regression model should be not less than 10 or 20 to 1 to achieve reliable effect estimates. Applications of propensity score approaches for confounding control in practice, however, do often not consider these recommendations. STUDY DESIGN AND
SETTING: We conducted extensive Monte Carlo and plasmode simulation studies to investigate the impact of propensity score model overfitting on the performance in estimating conditional and marginal odds ratios using different established propensity score inference approaches. We assessed estimate accuracy and precision as well as associated type I error and type II error rates in testing the null hypothesis of no exposure effect.
RESULTS: For all inference approaches considered, our simulation study revealed considerably inflated standard errors of effect estimates when using overfitted propensity score models. Overfitting did not considerably affect type I error rates for most inference approaches. However, because of residual confounding, estimation performance and type I error probabilities were unsatisfactory when using propensity score quintile adjustment.
CONCLUSION: Overfitting of propensity score models should be avoided to obtain reliable estimates of treatment or exposure effects in individual studies.
Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Confounder adjustment; Inverse probability weighting; Logistic regression; Odds ratio; Overfitting; Propensity score

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27498378      PMCID: PMC5756087          DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2016.05.017

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol        ISSN: 0895-4356            Impact factor:   6.437


  17 in total

1.  Logistic regression modeling and the number of events per variable: selection bias dominates.

Authors:  Ewout W Steyerberg; Michael Schemper; Frank E Harrell
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2011-12       Impact factor: 6.437

2.  Splines for trend analysis and continuous confounder control.

Authors:  Chanelle J Howe; Stephen R Cole; Daniel J Westreich; Sander Greenland; Sonia Napravnik; Joseph J Eron
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  2011-11       Impact factor: 4.822

3.  Flexible regression models with cubic splines.

Authors:  S Durrleman; R Simon
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1989-05       Impact factor: 2.373

4.  Propensity score methods for bias reduction in the comparison of a treatment to a non-randomized control group.

Authors:  R B D'Agostino
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1998-10-15       Impact factor: 2.373

5.  Invited commentary: positivity in practice.

Authors:  Daniel Westreich; Stephen R Cole
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2010-02-05       Impact factor: 4.897

6.  Plasmode simulation for the evaluation of pharmacoepidemiologic methods in complex healthcare databases.

Authors:  Jessica M Franklin; Sebastian Schneeweiss; Jennifer M Polinski; Jeremy A Rassen
Journal:  Comput Stat Data Anal       Date:  2014-04       Impact factor: 1.681

7.  The effectiveness of right heart catheterization in the initial care of critically ill patients. SUPPORT Investigators.

Authors:  A F Connors; T Speroff; N V Dawson; C Thomas; F E Harrell; D Wagner; N Desbiens; L Goldman; A W Wu; R M Califf; W J Fulkerson; H Vidaillet; S Broste; P Bellamy; J Lynn; W A Knaus
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1996-09-18       Impact factor: 56.272

8.  Bias associated with using the estimated propensity score as a regression covariate.

Authors:  Erinn M Hade; Bo Lu
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2013-06-21       Impact factor: 2.373

9.  Variance reduction in randomised trials by inverse probability weighting using the propensity score.

Authors:  Elizabeth J Williamson; Andrew Forbes; Ian R White
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2013-09-30       Impact factor: 2.373

Review 10.  Moving towards best practice when using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) using the propensity score to estimate causal treatment effects in observational studies.

Authors:  Peter C Austin; Elizabeth A Stuart
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2015-08-03       Impact factor: 2.373

View more
  5 in total

1.  An evaluation of exact matching and propensity score methods as applied in a comparative effectiveness study of inhaled corticosteroids in asthma.

Authors:  Anne Burden; Nicolas Roche; Cristiana Miglio; Elizabeth V Hillyer; Dirkje S Postma; Ron Mc Herings; Jetty A Overbeek; Javaria Mona Khalid; Daniela van Eickels; David B Price
Journal:  Pragmat Obs Res       Date:  2017-03-22

2.  Bleeding risk of ticagrelor compared to clopidogrel in intensive care unit patients with acute coronary syndrome: A propensity-score matching analysis.

Authors:  Thibault Charpentier; Cyril Ferdynus; Thomas Lair; Charlotte Cordier; Caroline Brulliard; Dorothée Valance; Malo Emery; Margot Caron; Nicolas Allou; Jérôme Allyn
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-05-04       Impact factor: 3.240

3.  Oolong Tea Consumption and the Risk of Oral Squamous Cell Carcinoma: A Propensity Score-Based Analysis in Southeast China.

Authors:  Qingrong Deng; Yuying Wu; Xiaoying Hu; Huiqing Wu; Mengzhu Guo; Yimin Lin; Menglin Yu; Wenwen Huang; Yuxuan Wu; Lisong Lin; Yu Qiu; Jing Wang; Baochang He; Fa Chen
Journal:  Front Nutr       Date:  2022-07-07

4.  Circulating ANGPTL8 levels and risk of kidney function decline: Results from the 4C Study.

Authors:  Huajie Zou; Yongping Xu; Zhelong Liu; Xuefeng Yu; Xiaoyu Meng; Danpei Li; Xi Chen; Tingting Du; Yan Yang; Yong Chen; Shiying Shao; Gang Yuan; Xinrong Zhou; Shuhong Hu; Wentao He; Delin Ma; Junhui Xie; Benping Zhang; Jianhua Zhang; Wenjun Li
Journal:  Cardiovasc Diabetol       Date:  2021-06-24       Impact factor: 9.951

5.  Impact of levosimendan on weaning from peripheral venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in intensive care unit.

Authors:  Shamir Vally; Cyril Ferdynus; Romain Persichini; Bruno Bouchet; Eric Braunberger; Hugo Lo Pinto; Olivier Martinet; David Vandroux; Thomas Aujoulat; Jérôme Allyn; Nicolas Allou
Journal:  Ann Intensive Care       Date:  2019-02-01       Impact factor: 6.925

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.